Protein enhanced gelatin-like dessert

ABSTRACT

Various compositions for producing translucent to opaque protein enhanced dessert gels are disclosed. In general, the dessert gels comprise a gelling system plus flavorings, colorings, and nutritional additives. Exemplary embodiments of the gelling system comprise water, sweetener, carrageenan, and various proteins such as soy protein isolate, soy protein concentrate, whey, and sodium caseinate.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

[0001] The present invention relates generally to food products, andmore particularly to, a gelatin-like dessert containing protein.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

[0002] Gelatin desserts have come a long way since their inception. Thepatent to produce gelatin was first granted to Peter Cooper, of TomThumb engine and Cooper Union fame, in 1845. Over 150 years later,gelatin snacks produced under the Jell-O brand name sell more than 400million boxes annually. Touted as “America's favorite food”, Jell-Obrand gelatin desserts has gained extraordinary popularity and isregularly eaten in 72% of all American households. This results in salesof over $212 million.

[0003] Hospital food ideally should be highly nutritious and functionalin nature, but currently most hospital food does not measure up to thisideal. For example, hospitalized patients on fluid-only diets areallowed to eat gelatin desserts. The water inside the gelatin dessertsserves to rehydrate the body. However, besides helping to rehydrate thebody and the presence of sugar, gelatin desserts provide littlenutritional value to aid in the recovery of the patient. Each day, overten thousand servings of gelatin desserts are taken to the bedsides ofpeople with a variety of ailments, from cancer patients to childrenrecovering from tonsillectomies. These people would greatly benefit froma gelatin-like dessert which also included essential vitamins, minerals,and phyto-chemicals to aid their recovering bodies. Since diet has beenlinked to heart disease and some types of cancer, it would make sensethat providing the sick patients with nutritious, healthy food would bea great option.

[0004] Accordingly, there is a need for a food product that is similarto those gelatin desserts produced under the Jell-O brand, but providesmore nutritional value and in particular is a good source of protein.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

[0005] The present invention addresses the above-identified need, aswell as others, with a gelatin-like dessert that is translucent toopaque in appearance and that features a protein component. In anexemplary embodiment of the present invention, there is provided adessert comprising a gelling system plus optional flavorings, colorings,and nutritional additives. In particular, the gelling system of theexemplary embodiments comprises water, sweetener, a gelling agent, and aprotein component.

[0006] It is an object of the present invention to provide an improveddessert gel and mix for making same.

[0007] It is also an object of the present invention to provide a newand useful dessert gel and mix for same.

[0008] It is another object of the present invention to provide adessert gel that is vegetarian friendly.

[0009] It is yet another object of the present invention to provide adessert gel having a substantial protein component.

[0010] It is yet another object of the present invention to provide adessert gel having a carrageenan based gelling system with a relativelyslow rate of water loss.

[0011] The above and other objects, features, and advantages of thepresent invention will become apparent from the following descriptionand the attached drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0012]FIG. 1 depicts an exemplary taste test survey utilized to helpreformulate the dessert gels of the present invention;

[0013] FIGS. 2-7 illustrate the evolution of the storage modulus G′ andthe loss modulus G″ during the cooling phase for various gellingsystems;

[0014] FIGS. 8-13 illustrate the evolution of the storage modulus G′ andthe loss modulus G″ during the holding phase for various gellingsystems;

[0015] FIGS. 14-19 illustrate the gellation rate of various gellingsystems during the first 15 minutes of the holding phase;

[0016] FIGS. 20-24 illustrate the melting profiles of various gellingsystems;

[0017]FIG. 25 illustrates a testing appartus for biaxial extensionalviscometry testing of gel sample; and

[0018] FIGS. 26-29 illustrate the 50% stress versus 50% strain resultsfor various gelling systems.

DESCRIPTION OF EXEMPLARY EMBODIMENTS

[0019] While the invention is susceptible to various modifications andalternative forms, exemplary embodiments thereof have been shown by wayof example in the drawings and will herein be described in detail. Itshould be understood, however, that there is no intent to limit theinvention to the particular forms disclosed, but on the contrary, theintention is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternativesfalling within the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by theappended claims.

[0020] The dessert gel of the present invention generally includes atranslucent to opaque gelling system, sweeteners, flavorings, colorings,and nutritional additives. In the exemplary embodiments of the presentinvention, the gelling system includes a liquid component, a gellingagent component, and a protein component. The liquid component of thegelling system is preferably water but could also be fruit juice oranother water based liquid. In general, the liquid component of thegelling system serves as a hydrating and carrier function for thedessert gel.

[0021] The gelling agent component of the dessert gel preferablyincludes carrageenan, and more particularly consists essentially ofGenugel type LC4 a kappa-carrageenan/iota-carrageenan mixturemanufactured by Hercules of Wilmington, Del. While not tested, othertypes of gelling agents known to those of ordinary skill in the industryin combination with the liquid component and the protein component mayalso produce suitable dessert gels. In general, the carrageenan of thepreferred embodiment causes gelation of the liquid component of thegelling system, and in exemplary embodiments the gelling agent comprisesabout 0.43% to about 1.204%, about 0.62% to about 1.204%, about 0.62% toabout 0.85%, or about 0.806% to about 0.85% by weight of the resultingdessert gel.

[0022] In a preferred embodiment of the dessert gel, the proteincomponent of the gelling system includes a soy protein isolate havinghigh gelling characteristics, and more particularly includes PROFAM 974soy protein isolate having a protein content by weight of 90% andmanufactured by ADM of Decatur, Ill. Acceptable but lesser qualitydessert gels of the present invention have been achieved by using inplace of the soy protein isolate: soy protein concentrate in particularArcon F soy protein concentrate having a protein content by weight of69% and manufactured by ADM of Decatur, Ill.; whey having a proteincontent by weight of 50% and manufactured by Davisco International of LeSueur, Minn.; and sodium caseinate having a protein content by weight of94% and manufactured by ICN Biochemicals of Cleveland, Ohio.

[0023] It is expected that suitable gelling systems may be achieved byusing whey protein isolate and other water soluble proteins derived fromvarious animal and vegetable sources. The protein of the gelling systemgenerally enhances the overall gelling system by (i) increasing thestrength of the resulting gel, (ii) decreasing the rate of syneresis(i.e. decreasing the rate the liquid component exudes from the structureof the gelling system), and (iii) increasing the nutritional value ofthe dessert gel. As will be discussed below, suitable gelling systemsfor dessert gels have been formed with a protein component comprising atleast 50%, at least 69%, at least 90%, or at least 94% protein byweight. Mixtures of the above proteins or other sources of proteinscould result in suitable gelling systems being formed with a proteincomponent comprising about 50% to about 94%, about 69% to about 94%, orabout 69% to about 90% protein by weight.

[0024] In the exemplary embodiments, the dessert gel includescrystalline fructose which may be obtained from A. E. Staley ofLafayette, Ind. However, it is contemplated that other sweeteners mayalso be used to impart the desired level of sweetness to the dessert gelsuch as saccharin, sucrose, aspartame, sorbitol, cane sugar, rice syrup,as well as others. In the exemplary embodiments, the dessert gel alsoincludes flavorings such as cherry, lemon, and orange which may beobtained from Universal Flavors, Inc. a division of Universal Foods ofMilwaukee, Wis. Again, other flavorings and sources of flavorings arecontemplated for use with the dessert gel of the present invention. Inorder to provide the dessert gel with additional tartness, some of theexemplary dessert gels include ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) which alsoprovides additional nutritional value. It is contemplated that thedessert gel may be produced without ascorbic acid or may be producedwith other ingredients to impart an appropriate flavor to the dessertgel.

[0025] In a preferred embodiment, the dessert gel includes variousnutritional additives such as soy isoflavones and calcium from calciumgluconate. Various research has indicated that soy isoflavones mayprovide many health benefits such as reducing menopause systems andhelping to combat various forms of cancer. Among other things, calciumaids in maintaining strong teeth and bones, and helps prevent or slowosteoporosis a disease in which bones become porous and brittle. It isfurther contemplated that the dessert gel may include other nutritionaladditives such as other vitamins and other minerals.

[0026] Texture, Taste and Syneresis Testing of Dessert Gels ComprisingSoy Protein Isolate

[0027] Gelling systems comprising carrageenan as the primary gellingagent tend to exude water from their matrices over time. This exudationof water (i.e. syneresis) leads to a decrease in firmness, an increasein moisture, and bad mouth feel. Tests were performed to evaluate theexudation of the liquid component from the structure of dessert gel(i.e. syneresis) over time, the taste of the dessert gel, and the mouthfeel (i.e. texture) of the dessert gel. In particular, the syneresistest was performed to determine a satisfactory protein and carrageenmix.

[0028] Gel Determination for Limiting Syneresis Test

[0029] Various gelling systems were formed from 80 g of crystallinefructose, 2 g of soy protein isolate, varying amounts of carrageen, and0.02 g of annatto (coloring). These gelling systems were formed withoutany flavoring or nutritional additives such as isoflavones, ascorbicacid or calcium gluconate. In particular, five different gelling systemswere formed with each having a different level of carrageen ranging from0.5% of the total water component to 2.5% of the total water component.TABLE 1 Carrageenan at 0.5% of total water weight. Component % By WeightAmount used (g) Fructose  18.232  80.000 Carrageenan  0.405  1.775 SoyProtein Isolate  0.456  2.000 Water  80.903 355.000 Annatto Coloring 0.005  0.020 Total 100.000 438.795

[0030] TABLE 2 Carrageenan at 1.0% of total water weight. Component %Amount used (g) Fructose  18.158  80.000 Carrageenan  0.806  3.550 SoyProtein Isolate  0.454  2.000 Water  80.577 355.000 Annatto Coloring 0.005  0.020 Total 100.000 440.570

[0031] TABLE 3 Carrageenan at 1.5% of total water weight. Component %Amount used (g) Fructose  18.085  80.000 Carrageenan  1.204  5.325 SoyProtein Isolate  0.452  2.000 Water  80.254 355.000 Annatto Coloring 0.005  0.020 Total 100.000 442.345

[0032] TABLE 4 Carrageenan at 2.0% of total water weight. Component %Amount used (g) Fructose  18.013  80.000 Carrageenan  1.599  7.100 SoyProtein Isolate  0.450  2.000 Water  79.933 355.000 Annatto Coloring 0.005  0.020 Total 100.000 444.120

[0033] TABLE 5 Carrageenan at 2.5% of total water weight. Component %Amount used (g) Fructose  17.941  80.000 Carrageenan  1.990  8.875 SoyProtein Isolate  0.449  2.000 Water  79.615 355.000 Annatto Coloring 0.004  0.020 Total 100.000 445.895

[0034] In particular, the above gel systems were formed by respectivelyadding 80 g of fructose, the indicated amount of carrageenan, and 2 g ofsoy protein isolate to a 400 ml beaker. After adding the above dryingredients to the beaker, 0.020 g of annatto was added to the drymixture in the beaker. Annatto liquid ‘miscelles’ were broken up usingthe pestle and mortar method until the desired color was achieved. Thedry mixture including the annatto was then mixed with 355 ml (i.e. 1.5Cups) of boiling water. The water and dry mixture were mixed well for 2minutes at which time approximately 180 ml samples were poured into a400 ml beaker and refrigerated for two hours. The gel systems were thentaken out of the beaker and placed upside down in a petri dish.

[0035] The gelling systems were then allowed to cool for two hours atwhich time height measurements of each gelling system were taken inthree-hour increments with Vernier calipers. Data was taken at roomtemperature (24° C.) because this would be the most extreme conditionthat a dessert gel would most likely need to endure. The data could thenbe extrapolated to refrigerator temperature, where the gelling systemsshould hold water much longer. Below Table 6 shows the raw height dataobtained and Table 7 shows the corresponding percent sag, where:

percent_sag(t)=1−Height(t)/Height_(initial) TABLE 6 Transient HeightData of Gelling Systems Over a 12-Hour Span at 24° C. % Carrageen withrespect to Water 0 Hour 3 Hour 6 hour 9 hour 12 hour 0.5 2.2 2 1.7 1.51.4 1.0 2.6 2.5 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.5 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.0 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.13.1 2.5 3.2 3.1 3 3 3

[0036] TABLE 7 Transient Percent Sag Data of Gelling Systems Over a12-Hour Span at 24° C. % Carrageen with respect to Water 0 Hour 3 Hour 6hour 9 hour 12 hour 0.5 0% 9.1% 22.7%  25% 36.3% 1.0 0% 3.8% 15.4%15.4%  15.4% 1.5 0% 7.0% 10.3% 10.3%  13.8% 2.0 0% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1%2.5 0% 3.1% 6.3% 6.3% 6.3%

[0037] The experiment showed that the gelling systems with the highestconcentrations of carrageenan tend to exude less water, but have ahockey-puck like texture. The gelling system with the lowest carrageenanconcentration showed to be too weak and experienced a 36.3% decrease inheight. The gelling system with 1%, or a little over 1% carrargeenan wasfound to be the best of the above gelling systems. This was determinedby the fact that the 1% carrageenan gelling system had an appropriatetexture right out of the refrigerator and mostly maintained its height 3to 6 hours. This leads to the conclusion that if the 1% carrageenangelling system were taken directly from the refrigerator and eaten, thegelling system would be very enjoyable due to its relatively smooth butfirm texture. If the 1% carrageenan gelling system were subjected to aworst case scenario of being left out on a table for a day, it wouldexperience minimal (15%) sagging or water loss. Adding more high-gellingprotein to the gelling system would theoretically bind more of water inthe gelling system, thus allowing a more temperature and time resistantcarrageenan base gelling system.

[0038] Taste Testing

[0039] A “Descriptive Analysis” using “structure category scaling”according to methods shown in “The Food Chemistry Laboratory” (ConnieWeaver, 1996), per the International Food Technologist guidelines wasconstructed. In particular, a separate survey was constructed for eachof the three flavors tested (cherry, lemon, and orange). The taste testsurvey for the cherry flavored dessert gel is depicted in FIG. 1. Verysimilar taste test surveys were constructed for the lemon flavoreddessert gel and the orange flavored dessert gel. The dessert gels weremade in a fashion similar to above.

[0040] For each flavor of dessert gel tested, two different samples wereprepared with the ingredients indicated in Tables 8 through 15 asfollows: TABLE 8 Sample A of Cherry Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  15.75 68 Soy Protein Isolate  0.46 2Isoflavones  0.12 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.85 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Cherry Flavoring  0.30 1.3 Water  82.23 355Dry Annatto  0.02 0.1 Liquid Annatto  0.11 0.47 Total 100.00 431.72

[0041] TABLE 9 Sample B of Cherry Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  17.28 76 Soy Protein Isolate  0.45 2Isoflavones  0.11 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.83 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Cherry Flavoring  0.30 1.3 Water  80.73 355Dry Annatto  0.02 0.1 Liquid Annatto  0.11 0.47 Total 100.00 439.72

[0042] TABLE 10 Sample A of Lemon Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  15.77 68 Soy Protein Isolate  0.46 2Isoflavones  0.12 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.85 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Lemon Flavoring  0.30 1.3 Water  82.33 355Liquid Annatto  0.01 0.03 Total 100.00 431.18

[0043] TABLE 11 Sample B of Lemon Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  17.31 76 Soy Protein Isolate  0.46 2Isoflavones  0.11 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.83 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Lemon Flavoring  0.30 1.3 Water  80.83 355Liquid Annatto  0.01 0.03 Total 100.00 439.18

[0044] TABLE 12 Sample A of Orange Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  15.77 68 Soy Protein Isolate  0.46 2Isoflavones  0.12 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.85 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Orange Flavoring  0.30 1.3 Water  82.32 355Liquid Annatto  0.02 0.1 Total 100.00 431.25

[0045] TABLE 13 Sample B of Orange Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  17.30 76 Soy Protein Isolate  0.46 2Isoflavones  0.11 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.83 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Orange Flavoring  0.30 1.3 Water  80.82 355Liquid Annatto  0.02 0.1 Total 100.00 439.25

[0046] Taste Test Data Analysis

[0047] The surveys allowed each tester to assign to each sample one ofseven taste ratings ranging from “Like extremely” (6) to “Dislikeextremely” (0). Similarly, the surveys allowed each tester to assign toeach sample one of seven texture ratings ranging from “Like extremely”(6) to “Dislike extremely” (0). The rankings for each sample wereaveraged to obtain an average taste rating Taste_(average) and anaverage texture rating Texture_(average) for each sample.

[0048] The taste test provided information which aided in reformulatingthe dessert gels. The general consensus of the testers from the initialround of testing was that the texture was great, or “like very much.”However, the data corresponding to taste was not satisfactory at all.The most common responses were “neither like nor dislike” and “likemoderately”. After another day's worth of testing and adjusting thefructose, ascorbic acid, and flavorings, a dessert gel formulation wasobtained having suitable taste and texture properties. In particular,the flavorings were dramatically increased, the fructose was slightlyincreased, and the ascorbic acid was increased to provide more tartness.After reformulation, the dessert gels were found to be like commongelatin snacks in both taste and texture. The ingredient levels of thereformulated dessert gels are provided in Tables 14 through 16 whichfollow: TABLE 14 Reformulated Cherry Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  17.97 80 Soy Protein Isolate  0.45 2Isoflavones  0.11 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.82 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Cherry Flavoring  0.63 2.8 Water  79.74 355Dry Annatto  0.02 0.1 Liquid Annatto  0.11 0.47 Total 100.00 445.22

[0049] TABLE 15 Reformulated Lemon Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  18.04 80 Soy Protein Isolate  0.45 2Isoflavones  0.11 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.82 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Lemon Flavoring  0.36 1.6 Water  80.05 355Liquid Annatto  0.01 0.03 Total 100.00 443.48

[0050] TABLE 16 Reformulated Orange Flavored Dessert Gel Component % ByWeight Amount used (g) Fructose  18.03 80 Soy Protein Isolate  0.45 2Isoflavones  0.11 0.50 g Carrageenan  0.82 3.65 Ascorbic Acid  0.06 0.25Calcium Gluconate  0.10 0.45 Orange Flavoring  0.41 1.8 Water  80.00 355Liquid Annatto  0.02 0.1 Total 100.00 443.75

[0051] Comparative Protein Testing

[0052] Further texture and gelatin kinetic tests were performed on theabove reformulated dessert gels and other gelling systems that includeother water soluble protein components such as soy protein concentrate,whey, and sodium caseinate. The main objectives of these additionaltests were to (i) determine whether dessert gels made with soy proteinisolate have better characteristics than gels made from other proteins,and (ii) whether suitable dessert gels could be made with otherproteins. As will be explained in more detail below, the comparativeprotein testing indicated that the dessert gels made with soy proteinisolate do in fact have better characteristics than dessert gels madewith the other tested proteins.

[0053] Gelling System Formation For Comparative Protein Testing

[0054] Cherry flavored dessert gels, orange flavored dessert gels, andlemon flavored dessert gels were prepared with the ingredients indicatedin Tables 14 through 16. Gelling systems with or without protein andhaving a similar composition as the gelling systems of the reformulatedcherry, orange, and lemon dessert gels were also prepared. The basecomposition of the gelling systems is provided in Table 17 along withthe volume of water used in making each gelling system. All gellingsystems and the cherry, orange, and lemon dessert gels were made bymaking a dry mix containing all solid ingredients, followed by additionof boiling water to the dry mix in a round glass beaker. The dispersionobtained was stirred (with heating if necessary) until all gellingmaterials were properly dissolved or dispersed. The glass beakercontaining the gelling system was allowed to cool to room temperature,then placed in a refrigerator and held for two (2) hours. For kineticsof gelation measurement, the gelling solution was placed in the samplecompartment of a mechanical rheometer. TABLE 17 Composition of DifferentGelling Systems Component Percent By Weight Amount Used (g) Fructose 18.01  21.56 Carrageenan  0.82  0.98 Calcium gluconate  0.10  0.12PROTEIN  0.45  0.54 Water  80.62 100   Total 100.00 119.73

[0055] Texture Analysis

[0056] Following gelation in the refrigerator, the strength of eachgelling system was measured using a Stevens LFRA Texture Analyzer(Textures Technologies Corp., Scarsdale, NY). The gel strength was takenas the amount of force (load) required to push a probe with a round tip5 mm into the gel in a glass dish at a fixed rate of 2 mm/min.

[0057] The reformulated cherry, orange, and lemon dessert gel mixes,when dissolved in distilled water to form gels, had a pH value of about5.2. The similar dry mixes including different protein components, onthe other hand, had pH values ranging from 4.2 to 4.6. All the systemsconsidered formed gels both in the presence and absence of a protein asshown in Table 18. From our knowledge of gelling systems and the resultsshown in Table 18, it can be concluded that the main gel formingcomponent was carrageenan.

[0058] The proteins did cause an increase in gel strength as can be seenfrom the data in Table 18. The results show that the soy protein isolate(PROFAM 974) increased the gel strength of the carrageenan gel (gelformed without protein) by about 24% while sodium caseinate, soy proteinisolate (Arcon F) and whey increased the gel strength of the carrageenangel by about 35%, 47% and 44%, respectively. Also, the proteins tendedto impart color to the gels compared to gels containing no protein.

[0059] The cherry flavored gels had suspended particulate material thatdid not dissolve in water. Other flavored gels did not have this defectand tended to have a more uniform texture. Among the flavored dessertgels made, the cherry flavored gels were the strongest gels while thelemon and orange flavored gels were similar in strength. TABLE 18Texture Analyzer Reading of Various Gelling Systems Texture AnalyzerSystem Readings (g) Cherry Flavored Gel 40.0 ± 6.1 Lemon Flavored Gel34.0 ± 3.2 Orange Flavored Gel 30.0 ± 1.8 Basic Gelling System withoutPROTEIN 23.0 ± 2.0 Basic Gelling System with soy protein isolate 28.5 ±2.6 Basic Gelling System with soy protein concentrate 33.8 ± 1.2 BasicGelling System with whey 33.3 ± 1.7 Basic Gelling System with sodiumcaseinate 31.0 ± 2.4

[0060] Gelation Characterization

[0061] Gelation and melting kinetics of various gelling systems weredetermined using a dynamic oscillatory mechanical rheometer (Viscotech,Rheologica Instruments AB, Sweden). A small amount of sample (<5 ml) wasplaced into the sample holder (about 3 mm deep) of the rheometer. Aplate attached to the instrument crosshead was moved into position inthe sample holder on the lower plate. The sample was cooled from 24° C.to 4° C. at a constant rate of 1° C./min using liquid nitrogen to coolthe sample chamber. The upper plate attached to the rheometer crossheadwas rotated at a frequency of 1 Hz and the strain applied to the samplewas maintained at 3%. The temperature of the sample chamber was thenmaintained at 4° C. while the instrument measured and recorded theevolution of storage modulus G′ and loss modulus G″ over a period of 75minutes. At the end of a 75 minute period, the storage modulus G′ andthe loss modulus G″ of the orange and lemon flavored dessert gels weremeasured over a frequency range of 0.01 Hz to 10 Hz at 4° C. Finally, inorder to simulate melting, the gelling system in the sample chamber washeated from 4° C. to 37° C. at a rate of 1° C./min while the storagemodulus G′ and the loss modulus G″ were monitored.

[0062] Determination of the Gelation Temperature

[0063] The gelation temperature T_(g), was taken to be the temperatureat which a sudden rise in the magnitude of storage modulus G′, resultingin subsequent increase in the difference between the storage modulus G′and the loss modulus G″.

[0064] Determination of Gelation Rate

[0065] The evolution of the storage modulus G′ over time during gelationwas fitted to a first order kinetics

G′(t)=G′ _(max)[1−exp(−kt)]  (1)

[0066] where G′_(max) is the value of the storage modulus G′ at the endof the holding period, t is the gelation time, and k is the gelationrate constant. The gelation rate constants k for all systemsinvestigated were calculated for the first 15 minutes of gelation byfitting Equation 1 to the experimental data.

[0067] Determination of Gel Strength

[0068] The gel strength was estimated to be the value of G′ at the endof the 75 minute holding period at 4° C.

[0069] Determination of Melting Temperature and Melting Rate

[0070] The melting temperature Tm of the gel formed at 4° C. for one (1)hour was determined to be the temperature at which the storage modulusG′ started falling as the gel was heated. The melting rate wasdetermined to be the rate of decrease of the storage modulus G′ overtime after the gelation temperature was reached.

[0071] Gelation Characterization

[0072] In the manufacture of gels, hot water is added to dry mix withstirring to dissolve solid components. The gelling system is then cooledat a fixed rate to a desired temperature, usually refrigerationtemperature, then held at this temperature for the gel to mature. Inexcellent gelling systems, the storage modulus G′ and the loss modulusG″ are very similar during the early stages of cooling when no gelnetwork is being formed. The storage modulus G′, is a measure of energystored during gel network formation and represents gel elasticity. Theloss modulus G″, is a measure of energy loss due to friction during gelnetwork formation and represents gel viscosity.

[0073] At the gelation temperature, when a gel network begins to form,the storage modulus G′ starts increasing rapidly while the loss modulusG″ either mains relatively constant or increases only slightly overtime. During the holding phase of gelation, the storage modulus G′continues to increase rapidly until it reaches an equilibrium level.Beyond this equilibrium level the rate of increase of the storagemodulus G′ over time is very small. The loss modulus G″, on the otherhand, remains very small and does not change significantly over timeduring both the cooling and holding phases. Overall, the storage modulusG′ is a lot higher than the loss modulus G″ when a gel network hasformed. During heating of the gel or melting, the storage modulus G′remains fairly constant for a while, then begins to decease at aconstant rate when the gel melting point T_(m) is reached. The lossmodulus G″ does not change significantly during melting.

[0074] The cherry flavored gels contained large particles and were notsuitable for use in a mechanical rheometer. Thus Theologicalcharacterization of these gels were not carried out. The lemon andorange flavored gels were evaluated using a mechanical rheometer;however, the results of the orange flavored gels either were subject tosignificant error or contained enough large particles to make it notsuitable for use in a mechanical rheometer. As a result, only the lemonflavored gel results are presented below.

[0075] Determination of Gelation Temperature

[0076] The evolution of the storage modulus G′ and the loss modulus G″during the cooling phase of gel formation for the lemon flavored gel isshown in FIG. 2. It is evident that gel formation begins even beforecooling is started as storage modulus G′ is greater than the lossmodulus G″ at 24° C. Gelation commenced at about 23° C. (1 minute intothe cooling phase) as evidenced by the sudden increase in the storagemodulus G′ compared to the loss modulus G″.

[0077] The gelation temperatures induced by cooling for all othergelling systems are summarized in Table 19. The cooling profiles for theother gelling systems investigated are shown in FIGS. 3-7. The gellingsystem containing no protein had a gelation temperature of 20.7° C.Addition of soy protein isolate (PROFAM 974) to the formulation did notaffect gelation temperature significantly. Addition of soy proteinconcentrate, whey, and sodium caseinate increased gelation temperature,thus causing gelation to start sooner during the cooling cycle.

[0078] Determination of Gelation Rate

[0079] After cooling the gelling systems from 24° C. to 4° C. at a rateof 1° C./min, the gelling systems were held at 4° C. for 75 min each.The evolution of storage modulus G′ and the loss modulus G″ over timeare shown in FIGS. 8-13. Overall, the gelling systems exhibited goodgelling behavior. In particular, the storage modulus G′ wassignificantly higher than the loss modulus G″ throughout the holdingperiod.

[0080] Gelling systems containing no protein and gelling systemscontaining soy protein isolate exhibited the best gelling profiles: highstorage modulus G′ and a low loss modulus G″ increasing at a very slowrate (FIGS. 8-10). Even though the gels containing soy proteinsconcentrate, whey and sodium caseinate produced comparable storagemodulus G′ values (see FIGS. 11-13), they also produced much higher lossmodulus G″ values indicating a highly viscous nature for these gels.

[0081] The data for storage modulus G′ versus time for the first 15minutes of holding period were fitted to Equation 1. The results for thevarious gelling systems are displayed in FIGS. 14-19, and summarized inTable 19. The gelling system containing no protein gelled at a rate of0.0561 Pa/min whereas the gelation rate for the lemon flavored gel washigher at 0.0871 Pa/min. Addition of soy protein isolate reducedgelation rate to 0.0412 Pa/min, while whey and soy protein concentrateincreased gelatin rate significantly to 0.0869 and 0.0798 Pa/minrespectively. The results are summarized in Table 19.

[0082] Determination of Gel Strength

[0083] Gel strength was estimated to be the value of the storage modulusG′ at the end of 75 minutes of gelation at 4° C. Table 19 shows that thegelling system containing no protein had a gel strength of about 308 Pa.Addition of whey and sodium caseinate decreased gel strength to 243 Paand 263 Pa, respectively, while addition of soy protein isolateincreased gel strength to 371 Pa. Addition of soy protein concentratehad no significant effect on gel strength.

[0084] Determination of Melting Temperature and Melting Rate

[0085] The melting profiles for all gelling systems investigated areshown in FIGS. 20-24 and the data is summarized in Table 19. The lemonflavored gel started to melt at about 18° C. at a rate of 9.7 Pa/min.Table 19 shows that the gelling system containing soy protein isolatestarted to melt at about 15° C. at a rate of 12 Pa/min. Systemscontaining soy protein concentrate and sodium caseinate had slightlyhigher melting point (17.2 and 17.4° C. respectively) and lower meltingrate 19.0 and 11.3 Pa/min respectively). In general, the meltingtemperature and melting rate for all the gelling systems were similar tothose of the lemon flavored gel except for the whey containing gellingsystems which had the lowest melting rate of 7.8 Pa/min. TABLE 19Gelatin Parameters for Various Gelling Systems G′ at end of GelationGelation Gel Melting Melting Gelling Cooling Temperature Rate StrengthTemperature Rate System (PA) (° C.) (Pa/min) (Pa) (° C.) (Pa/min) Lemon276 23 0.0871 427 18.3 9.7 No 163 20.7 0.0561 308 — — PROTEIN SoyProtein 181 19.7 0.0412 371 15.3 12.1 Isolate Soy Protein 287 22.8 0.196304 17.2 9.0 Concentrate Whey 231 24 0.1867 243 21.4 7.8 Sodium 172 240.0798 264 17.4 11.3 Caseinate

[0086] Compression/Texture Testing of Soy Protein Isolate/CarrageenGelling Systems

[0087] Compression/texture testing was performed in order to determinethe effects on stress and strain due to varying amounts of protein andcarbohydrates in a gel. As indicated above the cherry, lemon, and orangeformulations were generally obtained by trial and error taste testing.The final consistency of the product, with 2 g protein and 3.65carrageenan, was chosen because of its agreeable texture and syneresischaracteristics. The foregoing compressing/texture tests extrapolatedfrom this basis.

[0088] The compression/texture testing was accomplished via “lubricatedsqueezing flow” or more technically biaxial extensional viscometry. Thegeneral setup of the testing apparatus is shown in FIG. 25. Biaxialextensional viscometry is commonly used for measuring the relationshipbetween the stress and strain for foods such as Jell-O.

[0089] Gelling systems having similar compositions to the reformulatedcherry, orange, and lemon dessert gels were made with varying amounts ofsoy protein isolate and carrageenan. In particular, dry mixes were madefrom 80 g of crystalline fructose, 0.45 g calcium gluconate, and theamounts of carrageenan and soy protein isolate depicted in Tables 20-22.After the dry mixes were thoroughly mixed, 100 g of boiling water wasadded to 22 g of the dry mixture in a round glass beaker. The dispersionobtained was stirred (with heating if necessary) until all gellingmaterials were properly dissolved or dispersed. The glass beakercontaining the gelling system was allowed to cool to room temperature,then placed in a refrigerator and held for two (2) hours.

[0090] After refrigeration, a bore specifically designed for cuttingcylinders to be used in biaxial extensional viscometry testing was usedto obtain a cylindrical sample having a 1.5 inch diameter of eachgelling system to be tested. Once cut, some of the gelling systems lostthere cylindrical shape when the structure of the gelling system couldnot support the internal mass of the cylindrical sample. In particular,when placed on a horizontal surface, the bases of these cylindricalsamples expanded thus resulting in a cylindrical sample that appeared tohave a larger base diameter than a top diameter. Although cylinders likethis were analyzed, corrections for the difficult geometry were nottaken into account. Some samples had very little of no gel structure,and therefore could not be included in the testing. TABLE 20 GellingSystems Representative of 3.65 g Carrageenan Plus Varied Amounts of SoyProtein Isolate. protein cup + mass volume percent initial product waterused Sample # protein (g) weight weight used (ml) NS01 0 0 138.42 22 100NS02 0.5 0.11 138.91 22 100 NS03 1 0.21 139.67 22 100 NS04 2 0.42 140.0822 100 NS05 3 0.62 141.08 22 100 NS06 4 0.82 142.05 22 100

[0091] TABLE 21 Gelling Systems Representative of 2.0 g Soy ProteinIsolate with Varied Amounts of Carrageenan. Carrageenan cup + massvolume Carrageenan Percent by initial product water used Sample # (g)weight weight used (ml) NS07 0 0 136.43 22 100 NS08 2 0.43 138.32 22 100NS09 3 0.63 139.39 22 100 NS10 4 0.83 140.43 22 100

[0092] TABLE 22 Gelling Systems Representative of 3.0 g Soy ProteinIsolate with Varied Amounts of Carrageenan. Carrageenan cup + massvolume Carrageenan Percent by initial product water used Sample # (g)weight weight used (ml) NS11 0 0 137.13 22 100 NS12 2 0.42 139.32 22 100NS13 3 0.63 140.75 22 100 NS14 4 0.82 142.07 22 100

[0093] FIGS. 26-29 depict the results of the load required to compress acylindrical sample a certain distance. More specifically, FIG. 26depicts a composite of all the loading tests, and FIG. 27 depicts theload required to compress the cylindrical samples of the gelling systemsdetailed in Table 20 a certain distance. In particular, FIG. 27 depictsthe affect of varying the amount of soy protein isolate from 0 g to 4 gor from about 0% to about 0.81% by weight of the resulting gellingsystem while maintaining the level of carrageenan at a constant amount.Similarly, FIGS. 28 and 29 depict the load required to compress thecylindrical samples of the gelling systems detailed in Tables 21 and 22,respectively, a certain distance. More specifically, FIG. 28 depicts theaffect of varying the amount of carrageen from 0 g to 4 g or from about0% to about 0.83% by weight of the resulting gelling system whilemaintaining the level of soy protein at a constant amount of 2 g orabout 0.42% to about 0.44% by weight of the resulting gelling system,and FIG. 29 depicts the affect of varying the amount of carrageen from 0g to 4 g or from 0% to about 0.82% by weight of the resulting gellingsystem while maintaining the level of soy protein at a constant amountof 3 g or about 0.61% to about 0.64% by weight of the resulting gellingsystem.

[0094] Referring now to FIG. 27, the graph illustrates that the sampleNS03 requires the least axial pressure to compress it to half of itsoriginal height (i.e. 50% vertical strain). Sample NS03 has the lowestamount of soy protein isolate of those gelling systems upon whichbiaxial extensional viscometry was performed. As can be seen in FIG. 27,as the amount of soybean protein isolate increases, the force requiredto reach 50% stain also increases.

[0095] Referring now to FIG. 28, there appears to be no discernabletrend for varying the carrageenan level with 2 g of soy protein isolateabove 3 g of carrageen. The reformulated cherry, lemon, and orangedessert gels include 3.65 g of carrageenan and 2 g protein. This isroughly between the two graphed samples NS09 and NS 10 of FIG. 28.

[0096] Referring now to FIG. 29, as expected, the gelling system NS14with the higher amount of carrageenan requires a larger stress to reach50% strain. What is interesting to note in this graph is that thedifference in between the two lines is greater than in the graphdepicted in FIG. 29. The difference may be due to the higher soy proteinisolate content. However, the difference also may be due to a lack oflubrication between the plates, thereby introducing error. Since thegraph of sample NS14 is slightly above that of NS10, it probably is gooddata. However, since the graphs of the samples NS13 and NS9 are sodifferent, and the graph of the sample NS13 is not in accord with what“should” happen, the greater difference between samples NS13 and NS14 ismost likely due to error introduced into the testing of the sample NS13.

[0097] As a result of the biaxial extensional viscometry tests, thereappears to be room for additional soy protein isolate to the cherry,orange, and lemon dessert gels, even if the carrageenan is kept at itscurrent level. From the stress vs. strain curves depicted in FIGS.26-29, it can be seen that the addition of an extra gram of soy proteinisolate only slightly increases the stress at 50% compression, thusincreasing the soy protein isolate to roughly 0.67% by weight of theresulting dessert gel. The-addition of more soy protein isolate wouldincrease the nutritional value of the dessert gels and further aid thenegative effects of syneresis due to the extra soy protein isolatebinding more water in the gelling system. Therefore, an additional gramof soy protein isolate should increase the stability and quality of thedessert gels.

[0098] While the invention has been illustrated and described in detailin the drawings and foregoing description, such illustration anddescription is to be considered as exemplary and not restrictive incharacter, it being understood that only exemplary embodiments have beenshown and described and that all changes and modifications that comewithin the spirit of the invention are desired to be protected.

What is claimed is:
 1. A gelatin-like dessert, comprising a gellingagent, a water soluble protein component, and a water based liquidcomponent which form a gelling system, wherein said gelling systemcomprises at least 0.38 percent by weight of said protein component, andsaid protein component comprises at least 50% by weight of protein. 2.The gelatin-like dessert of claim 1, wherein said protein componentcomprises at least 69% by weight of protein.
 3. The gelatin-like dessertof claim 1, wherein said protein component comprises at least 90% byweight of protein.
 4. The gelatin-like dessert of claim 1, wherein saidprotein component comprises from about 69% by weight to about 94% byweight of protein.
 5. The gelatin-like dessert of claim 4, wherein saidgelling system comprises about 0.38% by weight to about 0.67% by weightof said protein component.
 6. The gelatin-like dessert of claim 1,wherein said gelling system comprises about 0.38% by weight to about0.67% by weight of said protein component.
 7. The gelatin-like dessertof claim 1, wherein said protein component comprises at least 90% byweight of protein, and said gelling system comprises about 0.38% byweight to about 0.67% by weight of said protein component.
 8. Thegelatin-like dessert of claim 1, wherein said gelling agent consistsessentially of carrageenan, and said protein component consistsessentially of soy protein isolate.
 9. The gelatin-like dessert of claim1, wherein said gelling agent consists essentially of carrageenan, andsaid protein component comprises a soy protein selected from the groupconsisting of soy protein isolate and soy protein concentrate.
 10. Thegelatin-like dessert of claim 1, wherein said gelling agent consistsessentially of carrageenan, and said protein component comprises aprotein selected from the group consisting of soy protein isolate, soyprotein concentrate, whey, and sodium caseinate.
 11. The gelatin-likedessert of claim 1, wherein said gelling agent consists essentially ofcarrageenan, and said gelling system comprises at least 0.43% by weightof said gelling agent.
 12. The gelatin-like dessert of claim 1, whereinsaid gelling agent consists essentially of carrageenan, and said gellingsystem comprises from about 0.43% by weight to about 1.204% by weight ofsaid gelling agent.
 13. The gelatin-like dessert of claim 1, whereinsaid gelling agent consists essentially of carrageenan, and said gellingsystem comprises from about 0.62% by weight to about 0.85% by weight ofsaid gelling agent.
 14. The gelatin-like dessert of claim 1, whereinsaid gelling agent consists essentially of carrageenan, and said gellingsystem comprises from about 0.806% to about 0.85% by weight of saidgelling agent.
 15. The gelatin-like dessert of claim 1, wherein after 60minutes of holding at a temperature below the gelation temperature forsaid gelling system, said gelling system has a storage modulus G′ of atleast 300 Pa and a loss modulus G″ of less than 200 Pa.
 16. Thegelatin-like dessert of claim 1, wherein after 60 minutes of holding ata temperature below the gelation temperature for said gelling system,said gelling system has a storage modulus G′ of at least 350 Pa and aloss modulus G″ of less than 100 Pa.
 17. The gelatin-like dessert ofclaim 1, wherein said gelling system has a gelation temperature betweenabout 19° C. and about 24° C., and has a melting temperature betweenabout 15° C. and about 18° C.
 18. The gelatin-like dessert of claim 1,further comprising a nutritional additive selected from the group ofnutritional additives comprising vitamins and minerals.
 19. Thegelatin-like dessert of claim 1, further comprising a nutritionaladditive selected from the group of nutritional additives comprisingisoflavones, calcium, and ascorbic acid.
 20. A dry dessert mix that whencombined with a specified amount of water and cooled for a specifiedamount of time produces a gelatin-like dessert comprising sweetener,flavoring, at least 0.38 percent by weight of a protein component thatcomprises at least 50% by weight of protein, and at least 0.43% byweight of a gelling agent,
 21. The dry dessert mix of claim 20, whereinsaid protein component comprises at least 90% by weight of protein. 22.The dry dessert mix of claim 20 which produces a gelatin-like dessertcomprising about 0.38% by weight to about 0.67% by weight of saidprotein component.
 23. The dry dessert mix of claim 20 which produces agelatin-like dessert comprising about 0.38% by weight to about 0.67% byweight of said protein component, wherein said protein componentcomprises at least 90% by weight of protein.
 24. The dry dessert mix ofclaim 20, wherein said gelling agent consists essentially ofcarrageenan, and said protein component consists essentially of soyprotein isolate.
 25. The dry dessert mix of claim 20, wherein saidgelling agent consists essentially of carrageenan, and said proteincomponent comprises a soy protein selected from the group consisting ofsoy protein isolate and soy protein concentrate.
 26. The dry dessert mixof claim 20, wherein said gelling agent consists essentially ofcarrageenan, and said protein component comprises a protein selectedfrom the group consisting of soy protein isolate, soy proteinconcentrate, whey, and sodium caseinate.
 27. The dry dessert mix ofclaim 26 which produces a gelatin-like dessert comprising at least 0.43%by weight of said gelling agent.
 28. The dry dessert mix of claim 26which produces a gelatin-like dessert comprising from about 0.43% byweight to about 1.204% by weight of said gelling agent.
 29. The drydessert mix of claim 26 which produces a gelatin-like dessert comprisingfrom about 0.62% by weight to about 0.85% by weight of said gellingagent.
 30. The dry dessert mix of claim 26 which produces a gelatin-likedessert comprising from about 0.806% to about 0.85% by weight of saidgelling agent.
 31. The dry dessert mix of claim 20 which produces agelatin-like dessert that after 60 minutes of holding at a temperaturebelow the gelation temperature for said gelatin-like dessert results insaid gelatin-like dessert having a storage modulus G′ of at least 300 Paand a loss modulus G″ of less than 200 Pa.
 32. The dry dessert mix ofclaim 20 which produces a gelatin-like dessert that after 60 minutes ofholding at a temperature below the gelation temperature for saidgelatin-like dessert results in said gelatin-like dessert having astorage modulus G′ of at least 350 Pa and a loss modulus G″ of less than100 Pa.
 33. The dry dessert mix of claim 20 which produces agelatin-like dessert having a gelation temperature between about 19° C.and about 24° C., and having a melting temperature between about 15° C.and about 18° C.
 34. The dry dessert mix of claim 20, further comprisinga nutritional additive selected from the group of nutritional additivescomprising vitamins and minerals.
 35. The dry dessert mix of claim 20,further comprising a nutritional additive selected from the group ofnutritional additives comprising isoflavones, calcium, and ascorbicacid.